RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2148, 25 March 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This Dai. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) Civil Cases, Fish v. Young.—L3s 5a 6d. Judgment for the plaintiff by default for the amount, with costs. M'Ewan v. Bramley.—L6s. Mr Harris for the plaintiff; Mr Stewart for the defendant. The plaintiff and defendant were stated by Mr Harris to have been partners in a farm at Taieri Bush, and the amount sued for was for an amount alleged to have beeu-agreei upon on condition of the plaintiff withdrawing from the partnership, and fir wages for work done in harvesting. For the defence it was denied that any agreement was made such as averred by the plaintiff. His Worship considered, from the evidence, that the sixty pounds were decidedly promised, and from the defendant’s own evidence, the sura claimed was due. Verdict for the plaintiff, L 65 and costs. English v, Lamb, —LS os, for services rendered by the plaintiff’s wife; Mr Stewart for the defendant. For the defence it was asserted that the claim was a ficticious one, and that Mrs English merely waited upon Mrs Lamb, who died of consumption, as a neighbor and friend. Judgment for defendant.

John Bathgate, as trustee in the estate of W. J. Henuingham, v. T. Musson and E. De Carlo, —Mr Macassey for the plaintiff, and Mr Cook for the defence. Tho claim was to recover LIOO, the amount of furniture sold, under a bill of sale, Mr Macassey said the claim was based on the 145 th section of tho Bankruptcy Act, which was intended to strike a blow at false credit. The clause provided that, no matter to whom property belonged, so long as at the time of bankruptcy there was a reasonable cause to show that the bankrupt in possession was the reputed owner, the goods must be handed to the trustee. The mere fact of handing to the trustee did not settle the ownership, which was a question for decision of a Court. The Court had the power to order the property to be sold, but the question of title was a thing to be settled afterwards. Mr Henniugham made a declaration of insolvency on the 12th January ; it was filed on the 13th. Mr Bathgate was appointed trustee on the 12th. An order of the Supreme Court authorising tho sale of the goods was made on the 28th February, and a Gazette notice appeared appointing Mr Bathgate trustee on the 23rd.

W. J. Henningham, journalist: I was residing in (beat King street on the Hth January. I resided ip Great King street from the 12tb, having to that street on that day. I slept there for the'first time that night. Notwithstanding anything I may have sworn to the contrary, I slept in Groat King street that night. My household consisted of myself, wife, father, and four children. I was the only person who slept in Great King street on the 12th. I had taken the house, a private dwellinghouse at the corner of Dundas street. It was not furnished, My family were occupied on the 12th, 13th, and Hth in removing the furniture. My family, I believe, slept in the house on the 13th, excepting my father, who was in possession of the furniture on the hill. He had resided ■with me for perhaps eighteen mouths, and is now. With the .exception of three or four days in Canongate alone, he has resided with me. He came to Great King street on the 18th, after the sale was over. J left Canongate on the day my father was put in possession of the furniture, that was on the 12th January. From the 13th to the 18th my father was living in the house alone. My wife informed me there was plenty of provisions for him. I put into the house in Great King street blankets to lie down on, a children’s cot, which I had to buy at the sale afterwards, I never gave any instructions to sell roy furniture. The advertisement states that I gave instructions to sell; I gas-o no such instructions; but suggested that my name should be used, as I thought the goods would fetch more money. Hie alteration of the advertisement stating the furniture would be sold under a bill of sale sv; 1 a not made at my suggestion. I left with my father in Canongate a quantity of household furniture whch was sold by auction by Mr Milner on the IBth January. In the schedule produced there are some things named that were not in the house. I cannot fix a value upon any of the articles in the schedule. I cannot give an idea of the value, for some of the goods enumerated were sold six months previously. The goods sold for something like LSO, though they were worth LIOO. Mr DeCarle’a clerk told Ti)e he had been called to Timaru, and asked Mr Milner to act for him.

Cross-examined. —The property was secured to Mr Mussen by a bill of sale, dated February, 186!). Mr Mussen applied for money about a week before I filed a declaration of insolvency. Mr DeCarle informed me they must have possession. Possession. was taken on the 11th, the day before i signed the declaration of insolvency. I suggested my father should bo left in possession, to save expense. I estimated L 57 was due to Mr Mussen. Re-examined by Mr Macassoy.—My wife came down to Great King street about 11 o’clock, I believe. I do not know the declaration was filed threo minutes after ten o’clock. E. Co Carle, one of the defendants:—l did not put the advertisement into the Daily Times stating I was authorised by Mr W. J. Heuuinghara to sell his, furniture. The alteration in the advertisement was made after receiving a notice that- a declaration in insolvency was filed. Mr Henningham made a suggestion to me respecting the use of his name in the advertisements. I sent to take possession on the 11th. I was there once before the sale. Mr Milner sold the goods on account of my absence. The gross sale was L6l 13s. I consider the goods fetched excellent prices. 1 rendered account sales, and t .e list presented t<> mo contains the proceeds, the net amount being 1,52 2s. I he id a bill of sale as well as Mr Musson. L6O for myself and E57 for Mr Masson, Possession was kept until the sale on the 18th. 1 would not go out of possession. VV. B. Henningham bad lived with his sen for two years who left the house on the 11th. Could not say the last time when his son slept in the house. He was never there after possession was taken by De Carle. He (the witness) kept possession until after the sale, and thou went into Great King street.

Mr Cook observed that the Court would have to determine whether possession by Mr Henniugham, senior, was possession by the son. [The argument, we believe, was as to whether Mr Ueuningham, at the time of his filing his declaration of insolvency, had finally quitted possession of the furniture.

The question to ba decided was what was passing in the bankrupt’s mind, and whether the public were deceived.] Judgment deferred. 'Hare v. Watson.—L22 9s 2d, for bricks supplied. Judgment by default for plaintiff for the amount claimed.